On 20. 10. 22 14:26, Panu Matilainen wrote:

Which of the following will happen:

1) rpm will gain ExclusiveArch: %{rust_arches}
2) we will stop requiring the above in Rust packages, as Rust is 100% available
3) rpm will %ifarch %{rust_arches} this change
4) something else (what?)

IMHO if we do 1) we could as well do 2) because without rpm, we won't be able to build rpms. 3) seems somewhat tedious for no good reason.

I was under the impression Rust was available for all architectures (for Fedora anyway), no? There's no Rust code in rpm now either this didn't even cross my mind really :D

Technically, I guess the right thing to do is 1) when Sequoia is enabled. Ie:

%if %{with sequoia}
%global crypto sequoia
BuildRequires: rpm-sequoia-devel >= 1.0.0
ExclusiveArch: %{rust_archves}
%else
%global crypto openssl
BuildRequires: openssl-devel
%endif

This is already in rawhide, except for the ExclusiveArch thing.

That said, the non-sequoia options should be considered only a bootstrap aid, we're not going to provide security support for the internal parser for some fringe architectures only.

I'm not sure that answered your questions though.

Partially.

My main point is: If we don't support rust-free (stainless?) RPM, what is the point in mandating the use of ExclusiveArch: %{rust_arches} in our packages, when it is by definition always contain the architecture this is build on?

Hence, I proposed to the FPC that we should no longer make the use of ExclusiveArch: %{rust_arches} mandatory:

https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1220

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to